Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

I think that necessarily we need to consolidate some of our terminolgy and better define those terms. For some reason aikido has avoided the codification process. I guess because its more art than science. The three principles of aikido are kokyu-ryoku, tai-no-sabaki, and ki-no-musubi.ce or whatever the excuse. At some point we need to press eachother to better define what we are doing and why.
The instructors I appreciate most can both do aikido, and explain it. Its become cliche now, but Einstein's quote about explanation is very true. I think some of us have become more armchair and less quarterback. I think it reasonable for students to A. Expect an instructor to comptetently demonstrate aikido and B. Expect an instructor to competently explain the demonstration. I would argue that we have many instructors out their spreading aikido they do not understand, or aikido they cannot do. And to be clear, I think that this is not bad because it is part of the learning process to explore what you do not understand. However, we need to set some precedent of expectation when we will "get it".

Again, I think some of these issues come from pushing aikido people into the real world. What would happen is a karate instructor could provide a better explanantion for aikido than we could? I have a couple of decent judo books that cover many aikido pricniples better and aikido books that talk about the same principles. In fact, an important personal discovery for me came from reading a judo lesson from Mifune Sensei. How does our instruction stack up against other arts? How can we trash talk that neanderthal UFC guy when his coach can not only hand us our lunch, but he is better at explaining what is going on. Dang.

Mike has a point about our precision. Sometimes we are over vague in our aikido. Am I doing tenkan? Or, am I doing ushiro ayumi ashi tenkai? Similar movement, but two different things. Am I extending palm up? or palm down? We need to be prepared not only to assert a preference of movement but also a reason why. I believe this is most important because I believe the deep parts of aikido (the "ura") are in the "why" of the technique. How can you learn bunkai if you don't care why you are doing the kata? How can you learn kaishiwaza if you don't care why your structure is compromised?

Broke this from the "Future of Aikido" thread in order not to go O.T.

Ikeda Sensei shows a number of basic techniques using "ki" and/or "aiki" and/or "kokyu-ryoku" (they're all elements of the same basic thing) and a few were discussed pretty functionally in the now-defunct thread "Ikeda Sensei Demos of Ki". In a very real way, Ikeda Sensei can be viewed as trying to use simple demonstrations to focus on the basics of every Aikido technique. As Jon mentioned above, the three basics of every Aikido technique are: kokyu-ryoku, tai-no-sabaki, and ki-no-musubi. In other words, kokyu-power, body movement for correct position, and joining-together the two bodies into a unit. The examples discussed in the early parts of the "Ikeda Sensei Demos of Ki" are very simple examples of the 3 principles of Aikido, with emphasis on the use of kokyu-power.

Currently some people are using the term "aiki", but "aiki" is just a usage of kokyu-power. Kokyu-power is sometimes also called "ki strength". There is also a tendency to talk about using "internal strength" and "Internal Power", but in reality Ueshiba's nomenclature kokyu-ryoku (kokyu power) already covers the basic principle of "I.P.", "this stuff", "internal strength", and so on. In other words, a lot of the currently trendy terms are probably redundant, plus they tend to leave many people with the impression that some new or forgotten factor is being introduced into Aikido. Looking at Ikeda Sensei's examples, he is using kokyu-power as he moves into position with Uke to make a unit-body connection and then Ikeda moves the combined new unit with his center. When Ikeda Sensei joins his body to the body of Uke via a solid connection and moves his center/intention, that is "aiki". I.e., nothing has changed since O-Sensei laid out the 3 basic principles.

I agree with Jon that there needs to be some clearer definitions and I think (IMO) the place to start is with "kokyu". A lot of people in Aikido, a few years back, simply defined "kokyu" as "breath", but the actual definition as being an element of internal-strength has become clearer over the last few years. Come to think of it, there were a number of posts/threads getting more into the explanation of "kokyu" a number of years ago, but "kokyu" apparently didn't ring the bell, so a number of people are now chasing the term "aiki" without understanding that the core of "aiki" is actually "kokyu-ryoku". If there is going to be a discussion on defining the facets of Aikido, IMO the place to start is with the term "kokyu". Come to think of it, that seems to be what Ikeda Sensei is attempting to do.

Kokyu is just another Internal component predetermined by all the same factors that enable asymptotic activation. The whole, which connection with the infinite is, determines the downstream details. Telling someone which details to correct can only help the person if the reasons for doing so are understood. Breathing and kiai is not something a beginner should worry too much about. It shouldn't take but a few months to get it in accord with Internal's demands. I've been experimenting with a brand new Internal action which I'm calling asymptotic attenuation that works well with heavier and larger ukes in relation to nage, and by default it creates a distinctly new kiai that I've never heard before. Not to scare anyone away but the only thing I can compare its frequency to is that of a siren call of a cougar in heat. Of course I can't come close to the cougar's duration or amplification of its attenuation.

Kokyu is just another Internal component predetermined by all the same factors that enable asymptotic activation. The whole, which connection with the infinite is, determines the downstream details. Telling someone which details to correct can only help the person if the reasons for doing so are understood. Breathing and kiai is not something a beginner should worry too much about. It shouldn't take but a few months to get it in accord with Internal's demands. I've been experimenting with a brand new Internal action which I'm calling asymptotic attenuation that works well with heavier and larger ukes in relation to nage, and by default it creates a distinctly new kiai that I've never heard before. Not to scare anyone away but the only thing I can compare its frequency to is that of a siren call of a cougar in heat. Of course I can't come close to the cougar's duration or amplification of its attenuation.

Far out. Would you mind not destroying this thread with your cougar heat? Thanks.

Kokyu is just another Internal component predetermined by all the same factors that enable asymptotic activation. The whole, which connection with the infinite is, determines the downstream details. Telling someone which details to correct can only help the person if the reasons for doing so are understood. Breathing and kiai is not something a beginner should worry too much about. It shouldn't take but a few months to get it in accord with Internal's demands. I've been experimenting with a brand new Internal action which I'm calling asymptotic attenuation that works well with heavier and larger ukes in relation to nage, and by default it creates a distinctly new kiai that I've never heard before. Not to scare anyone away but the only thing I can compare its frequency to is that of a siren call of a cougar in heat. Of course I can't come close to the cougar's duration or amplification of its attenuation.

I really have been trying to stay out of the recent back and forth stuff with our friend Tenyu, but the post above just gives such a clear clarification to Toby's 'weasel farting' tag, that I just could not leave it alone. Just what the F--- are you trying to say in that post

O Sensei trained exclusively with asymptotes, albeit more in the decontracted. Being the foundation of O Sensei's practice, it needs to be reintroduced if one is really interested in learning Aikido.

Tenyu, are you trying to describe the asymptotic die-off of kinetic energy? That's not an "activation". Hit a fork on the edge of the table and listen to the asymptotic attenuation of noise, for example.

The activation of the asymptote is phase shifted after nage is finished with the power application of the form, so to the contrary, it occurs when nage has for the most part returned to decontraction. If any form violates Internal's preformal demands then that activation cannot be optimized if not achieved altogether.

It's very easy to make a fork ring on a table, the same however is not true for a staff against an asymptotic surface in space.

I call 'techno-babble'. What is an "asymptotic surface in space'? The die-off kinetic energy in a fork or a staff is basically the same thing, Tenyu. And yes, I can make a staff quiver.

Mike Sigman

Of course the asymptote 'dies off' but the point is to make it come to life in the first place which very few people can do correctly. And almost nobody can make the staff return to 'kakushibo' strictly using the asymptote without additional power application. You can see me do it quite proficiently in the Umi Kata.

Ikeda Sensei shows a number of basic techniques using "ki" and/or "aiki" and/or "kokyu-ryoku" (they're all elements of the same basic thing) and a few were discussed pretty functionally in the now-defunct thread "Ikeda Sensei Demos of Ki". In a very real way, Ikeda Sensei can be viewed as trying to use simple demonstrations to focus on the basics of every Aikido technique. As Jon mentioned above, the three basics of every Aikido technique are: kokyu-ryoku, tai-no-sabaki, and ki-no-musubi. In other words, kokyu-power, body movement for correct position, and joining-together the two bodies into a unit. The examples discussed in the early parts of the "Ikeda Sensei Demos of Ki" are very simple examples of the 3 principles of Aikido, with emphasis on the use of kokyu-power.

Currently some people are using the term "aiki", but "aiki" is just a usage of kokyu-power. Kokyu-power is sometimes also called "ki strength". There is also a tendency to talk about using "internal strength" and "Internal Power", but in reality Ueshiba's nomenclature kokyu-ryoku (kokyu power) already covers the basic principle of "I.P.", "this stuff", "internal strength", and so on. In other words, a lot of the currently trendy terms are probably redundant, plus they tend to leave many people with the impression that some new or forgotten factor is being introduced into Aikido. Looking at Ikeda Sensei's examples, he is using kokyu-power as he moves into position with Uke to make a unit-body connection and then Ikeda moves the combined new unit with his center. When Ikeda Sensei joins his body to the body of Uke via a solid connection and moves his center/intention, that is "aiki". I.e., nothing has changed since O-Sensei laid out the 3 basic principles.

I agree with Jon that there needs to be some clearer definitions and I think (IMO) the place to start is with "kokyu". A lot of people in Aikido, a few years back, simply defined "kokyu" as "breath", but the actual definition as being an element of internal-strength has become clearer over the last few years. Come to think of it, there were a number of posts/threads getting more into the explanation of "kokyu" a number of years ago, but "kokyu" apparently didn't ring the bell, so a number of people are now chasing the term "aiki" without understanding that the core of "aiki" is actually "kokyu-ryoku". If there is going to be a discussion on defining the facets of Aikido, IMO the place to start is with the term "kokyu". Come to think of it, that seems to be what Ikeda Sensei is attempting to do.

And all these years I just thought it was a roll cast I was doing while flyfishing on the Eel River near Eureka - damn I wish I'd known I was doing asymtotic attenuation! I would have worn a Humboldt State hachimaki instead of my old fishing hat.

And all these years I just thought it was a roll cast I was doing while flyfishing on the Eel River near Eureka - damn I wish I'd known I was doing asymtotic attenuation! I would have worn a Humboldt State hachimaki instead of my old fishing hat.

I'm selling those hachimaki for $25.00 each.

It has Japanese writing on it. Says "aikibodo".

Let me know if you want to buy some.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

well done for trying to keep the thread on track, I agree 3 of the fundamentals of aikido!

far easier for me to understand than asymptotic attenuation or whatever it is

regards

Mark

Hi Mark

I think what Mike Sigman highlights is the issue with some using differing words to say the same thing....and others using similar words and meaning something different

We all have phrases we are comfortable with ...and I think we could all gain more from this forum if we try to find common ground and not continually redefine things.

Just a thought...and not popping at you or Randall at all.

in this case...I'm personally comfortable with all of the expressions Mike has highlighted and suspect strongly they are mostly similar to Randalls thoughts.

What Mike says about 'Kokyu-Ryoku as opposed to Kokyu alone, and how people are becoming more comfortable with this being referred to as IP/IS particularly 'rings my bell' ...and ties in very much with teaching I've received in the past.

I see in the posts here (and feel it my self) ..a temptation to try and jump straight to this level...but I have in my ears the teaching I received from day 1..."first construct the body"...I've been taught that Aikido practice, especially with regard to shisei/ posture is preparation of an Aiki body. ..I suspect that this may be similar to Dan Harden and others use of solo excercises to build the body...(and will find out soon ;-) ).

So ..I've been taught thus, When through years practice one has prepared the body then you create something that may be capable of generating and delivering the icing on the cake...kokyu / ryoku ...or internal power.

A bit like preparing a rolls royce framework for a rolls royce engine.

Ikeda Sensei shows a number of basic techniques using "ki" and/or "aiki" and/or "kokyu-ryoku" (they're all elements of the same basic thing) ... some people are using the term "aiki", but "aiki" is just a usage of kokyu-power.

I agree with Jon that there needs to be some clearer definitions and I think (IMO) the place to start is with "kokyu". ... If there is going to be a discussion on defining the facets of Aikido, IMO the place to start is with the term "kokyu".

Watching and feeling Ikeda got me started on my own way of looking at these things, and agree or disagree with me, that's where it started.

Leaving aside my precise mechanical conclusions, let me observe something about why "breath" and "kokyu" (in the operative sense that we use it, which often looks like it has nothing to do with breathing as such), are properly descriptive.

We inhale and we exhale. Neither of these processes is passive. The sensation of breath is of two forms of "pressure" in the structure of the body. While these "pressures" are inverse to one another (obviously), nevertheless the sensation of "pressure" in the body is felt to be similar in both cases even though the action is inverted.

I can wax mechanical about the why and wherefores, but that basic sensation of pressure of this type which we operatively call kokyu, is captured in the mechanism and actual sensation of breathing. The extension of this sensation to the action of the remainder of the torso and limbs, and ultimately into a connected partner is a key aspect of the training.

When some traditional sources talk about breathing in on one side and out on the other they are speaking of a superposition of these two pressures in different lines of action in the body that actual breathing does not itself accomplish, but the description, which is otherwise nonsensical , correctly and concretely identifies the sensations sought to be achieved.

My effort hes been to define the nature of the inverse "pressures" and their interaction in the body, but I will leave it at that.

I think what Mike Sigman highlights is the issue with some using differing words to say the same thing....and others using similar words and meaning something different

We all have phrases we are comfortable with ...and I think we could all gain more from this forum if we try to find common ground and not continually redefine things.

Hi Darren,

It's a good idea in theory, I'm not sure how it will happen in practice. That doesn't mean I don't think it can or will, it's just there are so many coming from different levels and angles, with different backgrounds/lineages. We all have our own take on what we think aikido is. We all have our experiences to draw on. Some of those can not be fully appreciated by the reading of text alone.

So why can't we agree on the basics of aikido? That's a question I have wondered about since I discovered aikiweb about 5/6 years ago.

I quite like the ephemeral nature of it all. Personally I feel I am really getting a handle on how to do and teach the central basics of aikido.

Quote:

Just a thought...and not popping at you or Randall at all.

Even if you were, no probs, it's only the interweb, a place for sharing

Quote:

in this case...I'm personally comfortable with all of the expressions Mike has highlighted and suspect strongly they are mostly similar to Randalls thoughts.

What Mike says about 'Kokyu-Ryoku as opposed to Kokyu alone, and how people are becoming more comfortable with this being referred to as IP/IS particularly 'rings my bell' ...and ties in very much with teaching I've received in the past.

I see in the posts here (and feel it my self) ..a temptation to try and jump straight to this level...but I have in my ears the teaching I received from day 1..."first construct the body"...I've been taught that Aikido practice, especially with regard to shisei/ posture is preparation of an Aiki body. ..I suspect that this may be similar to Dan Harden and others use of solo excercises to build the body...(and will find out soon ;-) ).

I like both Dan and Mike's take on things, they are both different and often don't see eye to eye, but they do challenge the aikido community to face up to some uncomfortable questions?

My own background was not - build the body first approach - this may well be a valid and the right approach. I was taught that the mind had a part to play in every single exercise that was practiced. The body was used to train the mind, once the mind could do as it is shown by the body, then the body can relax and take the lead from the mind, following the mental construct in perfect co-ordination. It works for me and now I am stuck with it

Quote:

So ..I've been taught thus, When through years practice one has prepared the body then you create something that may be capable of generating and delivering the icing on the cake...kokyu / ryoku ...or internal power.

A bit like preparing a rolls royce framework for a rolls royce engine.

Try and stick that same engine in a mini...and it just doesn't work.

You have to be careful with the metaphors Darren, One of the best VW Beetles I ever came across had a 911 Porche engine in it

I'm not disagreeing with you, the body/posture does have to be right to deliver kokyo/IP/IS but the mind is the master.

Well, to be fair my original post in the other thread was more focused on identifying the need to better define many of our terms, not laying out any terms to define.

That said, kokyu-ryoku, tai-no-sabaki, and ki-no-musubi are good places to begin. I have heard on more than one occassion waza is often the culprit of detracting focus from better basics in aikido. Musubi (ki no musubi) was one of the terms I heard early in my education. I think this term is probably what many consider "aiki". In aikido, this would like as #1 for me, since I would argue without the "aiki" we are doing jutsu.
Tai no sabaki (and tai no henko) are pretty clear terms. They are unglamorous and mundane. This would probably hit #2 on my list since proper body movement is essential to any technique. The focus on "body" movement (as opposed to handwork or technique) is a solid principle in my book.

Kokyu is a little loose which is partly to blame for its vague interpretations. Kokyu rokyu maybe does a better job of promoting the expansion/contraction aspect of "breathing". I dunno. This one threw me for a loop for some time and is still vague from dojo to dojo; I'd argue this hits the "advanced" section. I actually perfer to think about kokyu as the expansion and contraction of musubi. I'd probably say the pressure of suki is #3 from me. That is, the concept that suki is the expression of openings created from a gap in musubi. In physical principle this is represented by also maintaining a pressue against your partner, much like a hot and cold front of weather. May be splitting hairs there...

Musubi (ki no musubi) was one of the terms I heard early in my education. I think this term is probably what many consider "aiki". In aikido, this would like as #1 for me, since I would argue without the "aiki" we are doing jutsu.
...
I actually prefer to think about kokyu as the expansion and contraction of musubi. I'd probably say the pressure of suki is #3 from me. That is, the concept that suki is the expression of openings created from a gap in musubi.

If a line of pressure/connection/musubi/ground path/(insert term-du-jour here) through the structure loses its continuity, the one of two things happens:

1) It collapses -- and progressively -- if there is sufficient dynamic applied to the discontinuity; or

2) It creates a suki/disjoint/lever/suit crease/(etc.) in the structure that requires an internal counter-lever to compensate. This has the effect of isolating any remaining power or structural reserve behind that discontinuity from being applied or brought to bear.

When we in aikido do various "lock-like" maneuvers (nikkyo/sankyo/yonkyo/shiho/kotegaeshi) and pins they are not for the purposes of locking and pnning per se, but to feel where and how these disjunctions occur or are created and how to deal with them when we feel them occurring -- on both sides of the training.

My own background was not - build the body first approach - this may well be a valid and the right approach. I was taught that the mind had a part to play in every single exercise that was practiced. The body was used to train the mind, once the mind could do as it is shown by the body, then the body can relax and take the lead from the mind, following the mental construct in perfect co-ordination. It works for me and now I am stuck with it

p.s. see you in London in May

Horses for courses I guess Mark...a good friend of mine suggests that traditional Aikido starts with the physical and moves towards Ki and that the Ki organisations tend to do the reverse...obviously a sweeping generalisation but seems to reflect our experiences.

Both ways have produced some good people ...maybe they are equally valid and the differing starting places are not so important as the similar end place?

Both ways have produced some good people ...maybe they are equally valid and the differing starting places are not so important as the similar end place?

Hi Daren

I guess the further up the mountain you get, the more you can see the various paths that lead to the summit, each path is long and requires commitment to the climb, but the view when you get higher up is worth it